Exceed the boundary of the development plan

Hello,

this concerns a building permit application that was rejected. The reason given is that the house would fit on the plot, but the boundary of the local development plan would cut through the building footprint of the house. This means that part of the plot is not designated as building land. This is not about a rear extension, but facing the street towards the edge of the village.

What options are there to proceed here? Is it advisable to involve a lawyer at this stage? Are there any court rulings known where, for example, it was approved that 40% of the building footprint of the house may exceed the development boundary?

Why was the limit exceeded in the application?

Regards Yvonne

What success do you expect by forcing it when everyone else had to adhere to it before?

Such a building boundary once made sense and as long as that purpose is not outdated, I see little success at least.

I would first find out why it is the way it is.

Good evening,

after reviewing the drawing attached to the development plan again, the boundary clearly runs around the property.
In cadastral maps, the area marked in red (from the development plan) is not designated as building land. So what is actually decisive as the valid development boundary?
Background:
The property has been in the family for quite some time, so no one can trace how and why it is this way. It was once said that boundary stones were misplaced, but you can't really argue that anywhere, anyone could come up with that...

Would be grateful for tips!

I don't quite understand. Where exactly is a building supposed to be put now?

Hello Renozz,

one would need to obtain all plans for the property, including the correct development plan, if there is one, and also the Bodenrichtwertkarte (!) - that can be worth its weight in gold in your case.

If there is a cadastral error, it can usually be checked as well, the effort is usually manageable, at least regarding the question of whether an error exists. Who has to correct a possible error is another matter.

In NRW, this would probably be solved with a Verzichtsbaulast, i.e., you move out of the building zone at one point and compensate by giving up area within the remaining building zone, which may no longer be developed in the future. This ensures that the developable area remains the same, but deviation from the norm is still possible.

So there are options/possibilities, but you have to look at it in detail.

Best regards
Dirk Grafe